Pure RNG is the worst thing ever.

[Heskett]

So here's what you do. You have that 10% drop rate (though in XIV in some cases it's more like 2%). You also have a token drop. After collecting a certain number of tokens (in your example 100, but that's a bit much IMO), you can trade it for the item if RNG hates you.

See, XIV has over 4 million accounts, probably around 500k active subscribers. Even if there's only a 0.1% of having that really terrible luck, that's still hundreds of people you're writing off.

I think it's anti-climatic and makes the reward less well... rewarding. I'm all for RNG just for that moment where you go "omg finally" or "yaaaas".

[NyarukoW]

.... RNG is the computer's form of FAIRNESS. ....

Sorry, but just like a computer/program/software/alogrithm can not "tell or deem who is worthy", the RNG is not a substitute for fairness. Fairness is a human set policy that is beyond the realm of a Turing complete machine. RNG doesn't even begin to be fair or define fair.

The fairness that exist with a system that uses some RNG is that SE has let player chose to play by those same rules knowing that RNG dictate their odds to win loot.

The thing is, bottom line, there will always be two camps on this. One side likes to have unbounded RNG, often because they have been lucky and the other side which wants to have RNG bounded, so that RNG can only be early and never late. SE has both in play, but for some items it is unbounded RNG that frustrates those that want the drop to happen after X amount of tries/times.

[Pandastirfry]

What would you prefer: 10% chance of an item dropping at the end of a dungeon or completing that dungeon 100 times to get the item? I personally would prefer the 10% chance because that's possibly up to 99 dungeon runs I wouldn't have to do. You could argue "But what if it takes you more than 100 runs and still not get that item?" and I'll tell you "The odds of that are extremely low and only the lowest percentile of people would even come close to having such bad luck".

Uh... That has a name...gambler's fallacy

The odds of that happening are actually statistically LIKELY

[Risvertasashi]

Uh... That has a name...gambler's fallacy

The odds of that happening are actually statistically LIKELY

I'd say certain, which such a huge sample size. But yeah, Heskett, this is exactly the sort of cognitive effect casinos and their ilk exploit.

[NyarukoW]

I'd say certain, which such a huge sample size. But yeah, Heskett, this is exactly the sort of cognitive effect casinos and their ilk exploit.

Exactly. The unbounded RNG with odds set to favor the house will over time make the Casinos lots of money and they need people to gladly contribute voting with both feet.

[AsahinaMyLove]

I lost 55 chances to get dark cloud minion so far. >_>
I did the whole run from the start. Didnt died once and roll a friggin' 1! While the other teammember was afking around - died ALOT and rolled a 98 and won!!
Or people DARE to roll on an item when they just enterd CT3 during finalboss fight? Those people should get a lockout on rolls as well!

How is this fair or even "funny"? <-<

RNG in this game is the worst "enemy/option" I have ever seen.

[Yukiko]

@Izsha: The Problem is not the player determine what is coming next, the problem lies within the system to have TOTAL calculation LIMITS. You will have repeateble paterns and as long as you repeat it as individual (as in sologames) you are changeing the odds by hitting other "spots". So now we have MASSIVELY MANY players and each dot/spot in a grafical shown RNG position is "ONE" player! So you have ONE system but many players (dots) and not one player repeating the chances!

To have statistical results you need to look into each "dot" individually and not the system by saying the dots are fine because the problem as said are in fact the system limits! It is true, that most of the time you will get average or lets say "near average" results depending how much tollerance you give it but in fact the deeper you dive in you will see its not correct and too generic!

So, the problem is you can NOT go and argue with basic statistics about the system, because it is not as simple, instead you need to make statistics about how possible it is the "same" dot beeing in the same "good" or "bad" Situation. If you say "astronomical low" and "pretty darn long" it shows me you have not calculated it or you have no idea what you are saying. Will we start doing some statistic wars now? When saying you will likeley get double loot ingame than beeing hit from the lighning in real life! Or what about having accident on a plane... The more you increase the tries on the "system". It does indeed make no difference if you alone roll the dice 100.000 times or if you and your friends hit 100.000 rolls together! The Problem you will get is to have other influences like: Is each of your friend roll the dice with same speed to same direcrtion and so on... just dive deeper! We are not talking about the "player" because then you are right, we are talking about the SYSTEM...

Please watch this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_tN2ev3hO14



Edit: If you like to go a bit deeper, you may like this little text...
http://www.cmi.univ-mrs.fr/~golubev/srcpdf/rng_test.pdf

[Izsha]

All he said was 'I'd take 10% drop over 100 dungeon quota because the odds of ME being the guy doing 100+ runs is low". That's not gamblers falacy at all. That's just going with odds in your favor. The vast majority of players would get their drops in way under 100 runs. Complete misapplication of gamblers falacy. That would be the same as "I'm planning on going to the casino and loosing money because that's the more likely outcome". That's just a statement of statistical fact.

[Limecat]

RNG should never be used to take from a player and completely negate time/effort/money. It should only be used for boosts of some kind. Take the light grinds; they'd operate as normal, but by a low % you'd have a chance to get a double-potency light gain. Or for the dungeon drops, each completion should go towards a token of some sort that can be used to acquire the thing after 10 runs or what have you, but there's also the small chance you get the end result and it discards the tokens.

[Risvertasashi]

All he said was 'I'd take 10% drop over 100 dungeon quota because the odds of ME being the guy doing 100+ runs is low". That's not gamblers falacy at all. That's just going with odds in your favor. The vast majority of players would get their drops in way under 100 runs. Complete misapplication of gamblers falacy. That would be the same as "I'm planning on going to the casino and loosing money because that's the more likely outcome". That's just a statement of statistical fact.

It's not one or the other, though. Take a look at hunts. After 3000 seals, you'll get your carbontwine even if drop RNG hates you. But if you have a lucky streak, maybe you won't need to buy even 1 log! There's actually several systems like this in game, it's just rare and inconsistent.

So, again. You can have the 10% chance. Just... normalize the outliers. That's what I (and I think many others) are asking from SE. Normalize the damn outliers ;）